Re: [TLS] TLS Impact on Network Security draft updated

[Dennis Jackson <[e-mail]>]

RFC 791  is nearly 40 years old.
RFC 4074 lists 5 forms of deviations from RFC 1034 and explains 
the correct behavior. 
RFC 7021 describes a series of objective tests of RFC 6333 and 
the results. 


The above RFCs describe objective test results and how they 
relate to earlier RFCs. In contrast, this document offers a 
speculative and subjective discussion of possible future impact.


I do not believe there is any precedent supporting publication.


Best,
Dennis

> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019, 3:47 PM Filippo Valsorda <[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]&gt>;
> wrote:
>
> > Before any technical or wording feedback, I am confused as to the nature
> > of this document. It does not seem to specify any protocol change or
> > mechanism, and it does not even focus on solutions to move the web further.
> >
> > Instead, it looks like a well edited blog post, presenting the perspective
> > of one segment of the industry. (The perspective seems to also lack
> > consensus, but I believe even that is secondary.) Note how as of
> > draft-camwinget-tls-use-cases-05 there are no IANA considerations, no
> > security considerations, and no occurrences of any of the BCP 14 key words
> > (MUST, SHOULD, etc.).
> >
> > Is there precedent for publishing such a document as an RFC?
> >
>
> I was going to say RFC 691 but no, it recommends changes to the protocol
> (as well as being quite amusing). RFC 4074 comes close describing bad
> behavior without an explicit plea to stop doing it, but has a security
> considerations section. RFC 7021 describes the impact of a particular
> networking technique on applications.
>
> So there is precedent.
>
> Sincerely,
> Watson